*ruins your liturgy*

You better hope for the sake of your own weak and wicked souls that these men are in heaven.

Orthodox are always right.

I Googled it and I found sedevacantist articles about how the Novus Ordo rite of Ordination is invalid. According to _Sacramentum Ordinis_
(Pius XII), the preface : “Da, quaesumus, omnipotens Pater, in hunc famulum tuum Presbyterii dignitatem; innova in visceribus eius spiritum sanctitatis, ut acceptum a Te, Deus, secundi meriti munus obtineat censuramque morum exemplo suae conversationis insinuet.”

[“Grant, we beseech Thee, Almighty Father, invest this Thy servant with the dignity of the Priesthood; do Thou renew in his heart the spirit of holiness, so that he may persevere in this office, which is next to ours in dignity, since he has received it from Thee, O God. May the example of his life lead others to moral uprightness.”] is essential, so this group (Most Holy Family Monastery) claims that the changes in the Novus Ordo ordination rite make it invalid. They compare it to the Anglican ordination rites, which were invalid (Anglicans now sometimes involve Old Catholics in their ordinations in order to receive valid ordination)

you don't know what canonisation is, besides anyone can venerate whomever they deem worthy although that isn't 'canonisation'.

Barlaam was Eastern Orthodox when he was debating Palamas and wrote against the Filioque I doubt he was even a Thomist.

Reminder that bible headship was given to Apostles on Ascension and will be with bishop perpetually.
Reminder that Cedeka was btfo by John Salza countless time on ordination.

*Cekada. Damn, I am still asleep

Nice try

His feast day is Nov. 14.

He wasn't a Thomist

If these men are in heaven I don't even have to try.

“But regarding the matter and form in the conferring of every order, by Our same supreme apostolic authority We decree and establish the following: … In the ordination of priests, the matter is the first imposition of the bishop’s hands which is done in silence… But the form consists of the words of the preface of which the following are essential and so required for validity:
“Grant, we beseech You, Almighty Father, to these Your servants, the dignity of the Priesthood (presbyterii dignitatem); renew the spirit of holiness within them, so that they may hold from You, O God, the office of the second rank in Your service and by the example of their behavior afford a pattern of holy living." (Pope Pius XII, Sacramentum Ordinis)

Theres no way around it. Pope Pius XII revealed as infallible truth that all those words are, in fact, required for validity. If you say that a word among those is meaningless, then you are saying that an Ex Cathedra statement is wrong.

Pius XII was talking about the traditio instrumentorum only, wich was established by the Church. Revealed truth, as in an Ex Cathedra statement, was not estabilished by the Church, since it's truth in itself.
"Besides, every one knows that the Roman Church has always held as valid Ordinations conferred according to the Greek rite without the traditio instrumentorum; so that in the very Council of Florence, in which was effected the union of the Greeks with the Roman Church, the Greeks were not required to change their rite of Ordination or to add to it the traditio instrumentorum: and it was the will of the Church that in Rome itself the Greeks should be ordained according to their own rite. It follows that, even according to the mind of the Council of Florence itself, the traditio instrumentorum is not required for the substance and validity of this Sacrament by the will of Our Lord Jesus Christ Himself"

"The matter and form make up the external rite, which has its special significance and efficacy from the institution of Christ. The words are the more important element in the composition" (Catholic enciclopedia)
"…diabolical error, when it has artfully colored its lies, easily clothes itself in the likeness of truth while very brief additions or changes corrupt the meaning of expressions; and confession, which usually works salvation, sometimes, with a slight change, inches toward death.” (Pope Clement XIII)
"Hence, the devil has always endeavored to deprive die world of the Mass by means of the heretics, constituting them the precursors of antichrist, whose first efforts will be to abolish the holy sacrifice of the altar; and, in punishment of the sins of men, his efforts will, according to the prophet Daniel, be successful. "And strength was given him against the continual sacrifice because of sins" (Dan. viii. 12)" (St. Alphonsus Liguori)

By that logic, how are eastern orthodox orders valid?

...

Nice cutting out important stuff.
Wherefore, after invoking the divine light, We of Our Apostolic Authority and from certain knowledge declare, and as far as may be necessary decree and provide: that the matter, and the only matter, of the Sacred Orders of the Diaconate, the Priesthood, and the Episcopacy is the imposition of hands; and that the form, and the only form, is the words which determine the application of this matter, which univocally signify the sacramental effects – namely the power of Order and the grace of the Holy Spirit – and which are accepted and used by the Church in that sense.

Theres no way around it. Pope Pius XII revealed as infallible truth that all forms used by Church that univocally signify the sacramental effects are, in fact, validit. If you say that a words used and accepted by the Church as form of this sacrment, which signify what they do are not valid, then you are saying that an Ex Cathedra statement is wrong.

If those specific words was at one time necessary even for validity by the will and command of the Church, every one knows that the Church has the power to change and abrogate what she herself has established.

Read this and stop sinning rore-sanctifica.org/bibilotheque_rore_sanctifica/15-anglicanisme-histoire_et_conspiration/1979-michael_davies-the_order_of_Melchisedech_(revu_en_1993)/The_Order_of_Mechisedech.pdf

I don't recognize authority as valid though. It all falls apart after that.
also what's with popes/monarchs trying to sound like God with all this "we" stuff?

This, however, doesn't make the other infallible statement simply disappear: "the following are essential and so required for validity". Thus we must infer that, by ''accepted and used by the Church in that sense", Pius XII meant any form that contain at least those following words that he specified, since the Church would never accept a form that lacks what is essential for it to be valid.

>in the first edition of this book I stated that the matter and form of this Sacrament, as designated by Pope Pius XII in Sacramentum Ordinis, remained unchanged in the new rite. This was a mistake as one small change of no theological significance was made in the form of the 1968 Ordinal, and has been retained in the 1989 edition
If the word "ut" is of no theological significance, then why Pius XII said it was essential? In other words, why would the Pope declare essential what is of no importance? Michael Davies is disagreeing with Pius XII.
This claim is quite a big one. Sacramentum Ordinis was an error? And the Pope left it that way? What else is there to corroborate this claim?
Wrong. The principle is that no change can be made on what is essential to the form.
This doesnt make sense. Can a Pope go against what a previous Pope declares as truth? As in "Pius XII said ex cathedra that ut is essential, but we say ex cathedra that it's insignificant"?

What is this?

Also, what do Priests do wrong in your opinion? I'm new to Catholicism (just got baptised last month). Thanks.